Beware the unintended consequences of good intentions. Case study No. 1: campaign finance reform.

In 2004, my boss, Gov. Bill Owens, stopped by on my last day to wish me well on my campaign for the state House. He asked me how the recent passage of campaign finance reform, via Amendment 27 to the Colorado Constitution, impacted my campaign?  

“Oh, it’s not so bad,” I said, “I don’t really know anyone who can give me $400, so a $400 limit is not really impacting me.” The Governor, a prolific fundraiser, chuckled at my 29-year old naiveté. The joke was indeed on me when the “Gang of Four” liberal zillionaires (Pat Stryker, Tim Gill, Rutt Bridges and Jared Polis) targeted my House race that fall. I scraped together about $40,000 – less than each “Gang” member individually contributed to the campaign against me. I won that race, barely, but lost two years later in a race so expensive the New York Times noted it in a front-page article. 

The presidential election year of 2004 marked the first campaign season following the passage of Amendment 27 and it’s federal big brother, the McCain-Feingold Act. Compared to 2000, campaign donations in Colorado went down, right? Actually, they increased by 75 percent, from $21 million to $35 million (https://www.opensecrets.org/states/summary.php?state=CO&cycle=2004). In 2016, Colorado donors spent a combined $75 million. (It’s actually worse than that. Campaign finance watchdogs cannot possibly track funding to the 501c groups that serve as partisan infrastructure but exist outside of traditional campaign laws). 

If campaign finance reform proponents intended to limit contributions and make them more transparent, they failed so spectacularly they should admit that a repeal is better than the monster they created. But the consequences on our political process are far worse than simply a flood of television ads. Campaign finance reform is directly responsible for our deteriorating political climate in three ways: 

• Weak political parties invite stronger factions. When political parties cannot fund basic functions like canvassing and advocacy, they lean on interest groups with targeted agendas and bottomless bank accounts. That debt is expected to be paid in full during the next legislative session. 
• Legislative leaders consolidate power, killing bipartisanship. Legislators might raise thousands of dollars, but legislative leaders are expected to raise millions. The dollars are so significant that committee chairmen and rank-and-file members have almost no choice but to fall in line. No aisle-crossing allowed, the stakes are too high. 
• Existential threats become a fundraising tool. What motivates a million dollar donor? The demise of their value system, or perhaps the defeat of the other side’s value system. Don’t mistake this point to be cynical: existential threats to a liberal or conservative donor’s worldview truly are on the rise. For instance, when a candidate threatens to destroy an industry, that presents a real threat to the targeted industry, and a huge opportunity to activists who want to see it happen. Not only does the money swell – so does the rhetoric, in a self-fueling cycle that eventually ends in defeat, exhaustion and shattered norms. 

The solution lies far beyond the purview of campaign finance rules, to reforming the size and scope of government itself.

The notorious 1920s thief Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks. “Because that’s where the money is,” he answered. Today, our government hosts the coveted vault. Campaign finance reform is a fool’s errand when government’s power is greater than ever. Subsidies, regulations, taxes and laws deeply impact every aspect of our lives.

Only reducing the power and presence of government in our daily lives can lower the political thermostat and restore our national sanity. Otherwise, the stakes are so high that no-one can afford to lose. 

Matt Knoedler is a former state legislator, lobbyist and political adviser. He is co-founder and CEO of CaucusRoom.com, an online community for conservatives to gather, encourage and mobilize locally.